Originally posted by nonconform
I think that people walking out is a disgrace to all the people of countries who have elected them.After listening to his speech i think he has some valid points,although i wish he would stop involving religion with everything he says.
If your memorys arent that short,you will remember the media forever building saddam and iraq to be our enemy with wmd.GUESS WHAT its happening again,a funny little pattern,to whip up hatred so when we go into IRAN to liberate them from the dictator,that the public will agree that we are doing the right thing.Does cheap oil ring a bell,once hes removed we strike up a deal with the new goverment that we install that give us cheap oil cos we liberated them.
YOU MUST SEE THE SIMILARITIES
What ever happen to the good old days. It use to be as simple as sending a sniper to do the work. I guess the rich can't make enough money that way,
Seriously though, does anyone disagree with statements like these?
We have all seen that how the inequitable economic structures controlled by certain political interests have been used to plunder national wealth of countries for the benefit of a group of corrupt business giants. The present structures are incapable of reforming the present situation.
The political and economic structures created following the World War II that was based on intentions to dominate the world failed to promote justice and lasting security.
Regrettably, in the current international relations, selfishness and insatiable greed have taken the place of such humanitarian concepts as love, sacrifice, dignity, and justice.
Lies have taken the place of honesty; hypocrisy has replaced integrity and selfishness has taken the place of sacrifice. Deception in interactions is called foresight and statesmanship; looting the wealth of other nations is called development efforts; occupation is introduced as a gift towards promotion of freedom and democracy, and defenseless nations are subjected to repression in the name of defending human rights.
I don't agree with the man on his definition of equality and freedom. I do think that we should be engaging him looking for a middle ground that adds stability to the region.
I did disagree with this part however. . .
Reforming the current economic structures and setting up a new international economic order. . .
There was more to the statement. I just really disagreed with this part. Every country should handle its own financial order/matters and get out of each other's business. Hard or impossible to achieve these days though.
I felt this next part was a bit disingenuous. His idea of cultural respect seems not to extend to christians and others. I say that simply because he keeps mention the return of the great Iman and "the one true god." Plus the fact that they murder gays and women who chose to date without a chaperone.
Reforming cultural structures , respect for diverse customs and traditions of all nations, fostering moral values and spirituality aimed at institution of family as the backbone of all human societies;
He made some good points. He had a few bits that felt like rhetoric for rhetoric's sake. However, I didn't see anything that offended me. I also didn't see anything "crazy." Like another poster though I kind of felt like I was being asked to chose which NWO I want. One under Islamic law or unchecked greed and disregard for the "non elites."
